User talk:Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --blue520 15:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Malvern, Worcestershire

HI tango.Foxtrot, Thank you for your comments. Malvern is a GA already, but if you are passionate about Worcestershire articles we would very much welcome you to join the project, check out the 'to do' lists, and help improve some the articles that are still in bad shape - we need all the help we can get.--Kudpung (talk) 19:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Images

Familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Non-free content. I understand that it is complicated. Non-free content requires a "fair use rational". This basically provides the reasoning for copyrighted material being used on individual pages. You can click on the baby image to see the FUR for its use at Dancing baby.Cptnono (talk) 23:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I also undid your removal of information presented by someone else on the user page. Notability guidelines impact article creation. Not article content and certainly not talk page content when its intent appears to be OK. No offense meant and let me know if you have any questions.Cptnono (talk) 16:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

What a boneheaded move. I completely read the history screen incorrectly. My apologies.Cptnono (talk) 02:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

other things called iPad

Hi, I would urge you to revert your change, as the article is not a disambiguation page. What does a (non-notable) padded bra have to do with the tablet? I think that the Fujitsu hatnote at the top is good enough and if Fujitsu sues we can include that but listing the specs on an unrelated device is not appropriate. --Terrillja _talk 02:22, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot. You have new messages at Terrillja's talk page.
Message added 19:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Terrillja _talk 19:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Your user name

Coolest one I've ever seen on here! Brilliant, even!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Drew curtis 2007 photo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Drew curtis 2007 photo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 06:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Drew curtis 2007 photo.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Drew curtis 2007 photo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Burpelson AFB (talk) 03:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel I have a grudge against you, I can assure you I do not. I think you are misunderstanding the allowable creative commons licenses on Wikipedia. You tagged that image as Creative Commons 2.0, however the source file on Flickr says it's CC 2.0 Noncommercial with no derivatives allowed. This isn't compliant with Wikipedia. Please discuss this at the deletion discussion rather than accusing me of harassment, which is simply incorrect. I don't even know you, nor did I know you existed until, like, a day ago. Why would I want to harass you? Burpelson AFB (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot. You have new messages at Talk:September_4.
Message added 11:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 11:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

MOKH SP GA review

ACDixon lengthened the lead for me in the MOKH SP article. Long wnough now? Thanks.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 17:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

GA review of Coboconk

Can you please undo your review, I was looking to talk with the reviewer first, as is done with most GANs, so that I could clean up issues here and there. I'm only one set of eyes, so I can miss things. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Harrison County, Indiana

Hello! You recently failed the GA review for this article [1]. It is customary to allow nominators a period to address concerns related to the review before failing them. The article did not meet the requirements necessary for a speedy fail. You may want to read Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles for a better explanation of the review process. The issues you raised could be resolved fairly quickly, and you will find most nominators work to resolve issues the reviewers raise within a few days. Given the perpetual backlog at WP:GAN, it can takes weeks to get a review conducted and having one closed speedily can be somewhat frustrating. While I am assuming good faith, it appears you have made a number of quick reviews like this recently. You may want to reconsider doing such in the future. I will work to resolve the issues and renominate the article. I am not asking you to reopen the review. Please don't be offended, I am just offering some friendly advice. :) You may find other editors are a bit less non-biting than I. Happy editing and thanks for the contributions you are making! —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, just to reiterate, I don't consider my actions to be a "quick-fail" (or a "speedy fail", as the term you use is). I actually don't like the practice of "quick-failing" the way I see other reviewers do it. Though articles that have obvious problems, like cleanup tags and such, should be removed fairly quickly. Nonetheless, even with those articles, I think it's fair to give a more in-depth review instead of a simple, one sentence "quick-fail", which is not helpful to editors at all. WTF? (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I do understand what you are saying. Peer Review is generally far more backlogged than even WP:GA and the there are much fewer editors that reviews. In many cases, all you will get is a bot generated review and occasionally a few drive by comments from the three editors there who do almost all the reviewing that does get done. But you are mistaken regarding the GA review. And reviewing and failing an article (regardless of how thorough the review) is a quick fail when you do not allow a period of time for improvement. I am also quite familiar with the GA process as a reviewer and a nominator. To quote the review instruction page there are five reasons to quicky fail:

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.[2]

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.[3]

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, or similar tags.

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

It also says: "If it is apparent from the article edit history and talk page that the nominator has already put extensive work into the article and is genuinely trying to improve its quality, then generally a quick-fail is inappropriate even if obvious issues still exist. Give someone else a chance to review the article and provide the needed help."

Additionally, some of the comments you made recommending improvements are not really in fitting what is the norm for county articles. Certain things are better displayed as lists. You will find significant similarity between all the US County articles, because large parts are created by bots. The same with demographics sections and other parts of the article. These are left as they are that way they can all be easily updated by bot later should a new format be decided on. This format was decided on by community consensus and put in place by WP:County and is acceptable. You comments regaring it as a good start but was missing information also does not jive with the suggested contents of a county article: [Wikipedia:County#Content_suggestions]]. You will find that almost all the suggested content is included. You sited no policy or guidelines in your review, and some of it just personal opinion. Articles need to comply with the Manual of Style guidelines and policy. It is important to point to which guidelines you are using to judge the article as unacceptable. And again, your reasons for failing could have easily been fixed with a few days. Again, just please reconsider failing articles as you have. I would advise that if you feel you should quick fail as you did in this situation and others lately, just leave your comments, but don't take on the review. Let another reviewer who has the time to conduct a thorough review conduct one. There are often things you may be unaware of regarding the article you will find out when conversing with the nominator. If you don't believe me I encourage you to reach out to a Mentor who can assist you. :) Again please take no offense, I am just offering some advise. I am more familiar with the article I authored which is why I use it as my example rather than other that you have quickly failed. Happy editting! —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 15:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

GA review of Frome, Somerset

Thanks for your comments & review of Frome, Somerset. I've tried to address the issues you identified and wondered if you would be kind enough to take another look & let me know if there is anything else you feel is needed?— Rod ^talk 18:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.— Rod ^talk 19:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Review for Madras State legislative assembly election, 1967

Thanks for the review and comments for Madras State legislative assembly election, 1967. I have addressed the issues you have raised. Can you take a look and see if everything is ok? --Sodabottle (talk) 05:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

: I have added the information as a footnote as you suggested. Thanks!--Sodabottle (talk) 06:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Likewise for Little Butte Creek (Rogue River). Thanks, LittleMountain5 00:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

And again for Big Butte Creek. :) LittleMountain5 15:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

GA review of Indiana World War Memorial Plaza

I have responded to your comments. Thank you very much! Reywas92^Talk 22:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Thanks for reviewing Little and Big Butte Creek, and for effectively clearing the backlog of the geography and places GANs. Great work! Sincerely, LittleMountain5 16:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

GA review of Pushkar Lake

Thanks for the note on my talk page on the GA review of the above article. Another user has carried out most of the required changes. I have made a few more changes now to meet your observations. I have replied on GA talkpage also. I hope that the changes made are acceptable to you.--Nvvchar (talk) 09:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for GA approval.--Nvvchar (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Now that the dead line date of 7th March has passed, please consider removing the listed review question marks, since you have already approved the GA. Thanks. --Nvvchar (talk) 08:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fark jeopardy.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fark jeopardy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ucucha 22:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Bionicle 2: Legends of Metru Nui/GA4

Hello W.T.F. I understand that the deadline for this GAN is tomorrow (in my time zone). However, I am currently trapped in a partial wikibreak and cannot edit very frequently, so is it all right if the deadline can be extended? Because, it would be a pity if this article failed when it is so close to passing, especially after such a long wait. I look forward to your reply. Cheers!--Twilight Helryx 03:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

pakistan GA

hi, i am extremly sorry for my late response on pakistan's GA

Due to very tough schedule these days i am hardly available on wikipedia, nevertheless i have prepared stuff for the suggestions given on the review page, i am gonna paste them tomarow.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 17:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

New Userpage?

Hey Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot. I see you're a new user, and I noticed your comment on the fact that you'd like a userpage, but don't really seem to know what to make, or how to make one. I might be able to help. If you would click over to my Userpage (in my name link) and view my Old Userpage (annother word link at the bottom of the page) and take a look, I could easily do that for you, you would just have to specify what background you would like, and what you want your bio box to say, along with the userboxes (which are optional, as well as the bio box). Or, if you don't like that design, I'd be happy to help you with any other types of Userpages.-The Untamed Beast 03:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:U.S. Route 46/GA1

Hey. Noting that the writer seems to have taken care of the issues a while back. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:44, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Also noting that you could double check Talk:Pakistan/GA1, which doesn't seem 100% done but looks close. May or may not be ready for a decision. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see the Pakistan note above, nm. While i'm bugging you about those above though, Talk:Harrison County, Indiana/GA1 can probably be passed now and Talk:Central Park/GA1 can be failed. That should be all in terms of older GANs. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Fark ping

You were just mentioned at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fark/archive1; any change there? Eubulides (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fark logo iran.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fark logo iran.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 08:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Flagstaff classification

My fault. The source is not really on the semiarid page but on the koppen climate classification page. My apologies also for borderline "yelling" at ya. You did not deserve that.

Slashdot GAN

I completed the GAN on Slashdot and placed it on hold pending a few small improvements. See Talk:Slashdot/GA1 for details. Thank you, –MuZemike 00:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot. You have new messages at MuZemike's talk page.
Message added 03:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–MuZemike 03:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Wiki.Tango.Foxtrot. You have new messages at Talk:Zanzibar_Red_Colobus/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- UtherSRG (talk) 14:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

nested parameter

Hi. Concerning this edit of yours I would like to inform you that |nested= is not used anyore. Banners are automatically nested while in WikiProjectBannerShell. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 07:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. WTF? (talk) 16:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Kent, Ohio

Hello. I was wondering if you were still actively reviewing Kent, Ohio for GA status. I made the main improvements discussed on the culture section shortly after the suggestion was made and haven't heard anything or any comments on the question about whether or not to include the Kent State shootings in the lead (and my comments regarding it). We discussed the placement of citations (I am planning on redoing several of the citations once GAN is over) but since I haven't heard anything I was wondering if you were still willing/able to review it. Thanks for your time! --JonRidinger (talk) 03:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it. Most of the "nationally-recognized" claims outside of that are statements by reporters (like here which incidentally also mentioned Kent being known for the shootings! :)...trust me as a "local" we wish it weren't so) and I found one from a Dillard's executive in a press release, so if there's question, I guess it's better to just remove it and replace later with a better source if needed. Thanks for your help and suggestions. --JonRidinger (talk) 04:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon

Hey there, I just want to let you know that I have removed the material you added to a section of Deepwater Horizon oil spill and moved it to the "main article" for that topic, Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion, where there is more room for such details. We are really struggling to keep the primary article to a manageable size, which is why the other article was split off recently, leaving summary sections. Anyway, nice find on that quote! Cgingold (talk) 01:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC) PS - Very clever name - thanks for the laugh!

That's fine. Didn't know there were several related articles already,. . . That quote could very well be the quote of the year. WTF? (talk) 02:11, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Central Park

I've started revision of the Central park article. Seems to have been somewhat neglected. I have the intelligence, education and time to revamp this page but I aint a Newyorker so will need time to research. Am doing a section at a time but some paras are very confused so need total rewrite.

It would be very helpful if u care to leave comments on my page of the edits I do to Central Park so maybe watchlist it? - Thanks - Markdask (talk) 01:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Rhodium GAN

Hi WTF

I have updated the Rhodium article according to your suggestions. Thanks for the help!--Stone (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the article! --Stone (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Your Edit To Page "Saint Consulting Group"

Actually, it IS "The" Saint Consulting Group. I refer you to the firm's actual corporate filings. You can search the Massachusetts Corporations Database for ID No. 042865634. I can't seem the undo your revision; I'd be most grateful if you could revert the change. Thanks. Full Disclosure: I am an employee of The Saint Consulting Group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carge77 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Richmond, Virginia

"US cities should have climate info from US-based weather sites, not Hong Kong". Is this Wikipedia policy? Is this the view of the majority of all other users here? NO. By that argument, many of the cities worldwide that have only World Meteorological Organisation data should have their infoboxes REMOVED; however, this is done because their respective nations' meteorological agencies are at times difficult to navigate. By the same reasoning, the similar data (from WMO) at Miami and San Diego should be REVERTED to NOAA data. Yet no one has objected there. Your logic and reasoning is utter fallacy. HKO runs the WMO site, and its data is directly compiled from national meteorological agencies, in this case NOAA. the HKO data is there because no other source I have found gives daily amount (hours) of sunshine; NOAA at times gives at most percentages, which is MUCH harder to convert into monthly amounts and not optimal for this type of chart.
The "only one source should be used" argument is equally bullshit-y. Fine, go untangle what you consider the "mess" that has been created on many US city articles and see how users react. Weather Channel only provides temperature (normals/records) and precipitation (strict totals, not number of days). Your removal of NOAA, an even more reliable source than TWC, constitutes removal of cited information, just due to this pedantic "only one source" reasoning.

I have a major problem with the opening sentence as well: "might be classified as modified continental". Well anyone who has lived in Philadelphia and northward for all his life will think otherwise. It's POV and not simple, relatively straightforward classification such as: "if the July mean > 10, then the area is non-polar". From what I have seen, the climate section of many city articles tends to begin (or soon after) with a statement on the Koppen climate classification type. ---华钢琴49 (TALK) 01:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Mount Tehama

Hi there WikiTango, I think I've resolved your concerns with this article. If you could return and see if there are any remaining problems, that would be spectacular! Thanks. ceranthor 22:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I think I fixed them. Thanks. ceranthor 17:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

GAN

Hi Tango, are we finished with the GA review of Mount Tehama? ceranthor 20:17, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your review and the promotion! It's appreciated, ceranthor 13:59, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

DOMA

Tauro only ruled on Section 3 of DOMA, not all of DOMA. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

And his is also wrong: "On July 8, 2010, the law was ruled unconstitutional, being against the notion of states' rights enshrined in the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."

There were 2 decisions today and they had different reasons for the unconstitutionality of section 3. You can't just stick one n and ignore the other. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

• I've tagged this image as replaceable fair use again. This individual is no longer a fugitive, voiding the prior arguments about this image not being replaceable due to his fugitive status. If an AP reporter can photograph him, then so can a Wikipedia editor. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Gibraltar GAN

While reviewing the GAN backlog list, I noticed that no dialog appears to have taken place in Gibraltar's Good Article Nomination in over 2 weeks, and the review as a whole has been on hold with multiple issues for over a month. I don't wish to step on your toes as the reviewer, but it looks like it can be successfully closed as a failure at this point. --erachima talk 08:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I came here to say the exact same thing. You stated the hold would be for two weeks from 8 June, and it's already been more than a month. Furthermore, no work on the article seems to be going on. Just messaging you, in case you forgot. warrior4321 14:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Colton Harris-Moore

I am a little confused about this edit. I know the link isn't the best since it is a blog, but is actively written and updated with news stories from many sources (more ligit sources like TV stations and newspapers) and first-hand accounts (like the top entry from the Bahamian courtroom) from Writer and Photographer Bob Friel, who has written on Harris-Moore for Outside Magazine and apparently writing a book on the whole saga (probably with details to come on Harris-Moore's trial and imprisonment). I feel, since it is linked to other sites and has first-hand accounts, it should be added to the page, instead of nothing at all (which is currently present). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:13, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Just lighting this up again. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC) PhilKnight (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Notes and references

Hi WikiTangoFoxtrot, I reverted your minor change to the "Notes and references" layout in the Frank Dekum article and, earlier, to the same change to Rogue River (Oregon). There's nothing wrong with your preferred layout, but I like the one I've been using. I believe it's a matter of taste rather than any firm guideline in the Manual of Style or elsewhere. Quite a few FAs have used the layout I like, and others have used the one you like. Both are OK, I think. Finetooth (talk) 22:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Colton Harris-Moore.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Fark

Hello. In January you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. [2]). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name "Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences&Windows 20:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Digg screenshot.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Digg screenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Twitter/GA3

Would you mind coming back to either delist or close this reassessment out sometime soon? Thanks. Courcelles 19:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:NTHINGS

Nice idea, to sort the list into volumes. However, the numbering system is somewhat screwed up. Some of the later entries were themed around the number that they were. EG, entries 1985 and 2323 were supposed to reference a song and a movie, respectively. Is there a way to split the lists and keep their original numbering system? That would be great if you could fix that. Finalius (Ecru?!) 21:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. Btw, do you mind my subtitles for the sections? Finalius (Ecru?!) 03:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Wal-Mart HQ

Hi! I noticed this edit: "(eliminating redundancy (it's enough to simply state it's hq'ed in Bentonville; no need to explicitly state "home office"))"

The thing is, "Wal-Mart Home Office" is the proper name of the headquarters complex. That needs to be expressed somehow in text in the body of the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Sagging (fashion)

Hello. I introduced a new paragraph towards the end of the Sagging (Fashion) article about a school where teachers pull up pants of students and "Urkel" them. You then edited my entry with the explanation of "rephrasing" and copied the source news article word for word, creating possible copyright issues. My suggestion would be to leave well enough alone, and to add your own content instead of "fixing" other editors' content edits. Happy editing.WildHorsesPulled (talk) 03:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi WTF! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

GA review

WTF! :-) I'm working on the backlog of GA reviews and noticed that Talk:Haplogroup E1b1a (Y-DNA)/GA1 looks all ready to be promoted to GA, but I think you might be tied up elsewhere? If so, I can close it for you if you say so or if you are still off-line a couple days down the line --DeVerm (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC).

Comment on SD review

Thank you for agreeing to review the San Diego article. I did have one concern on something you said.

Personal income was under economy. I realize that this is normally dropped into the demographics by the bot(s). It, however, does directly affect the economy and is one of the most powerful engines that drives the economy. I know that User:Nyttend once disagreed with me on that but seemed to support this view as well. I edit quite a few place pages and have universally made this change from what the bots did. There was no "economy" section back when. I would appreciate your rethinking this. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 13:58, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

With this edit, I thee...

With this edit, did you mean to delete the shortcuts? WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

San Diego GA

Just a reminder that the GA review at Talk:San Diego is still open. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Q

Why? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:31, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Slashdot

Some of your 12 August edits seem a bit ... inconsistent. No need for a revert war, since you're doing a fine job solo (heh). Seriously, I favor restoral of (primary-) sourced material like this as "restoring an inappropriate deletion", but then you deleted it again here as "comments". IMO, the message base growth milestones, and most popular topics, are not mere "comments", but would certainly benefit from some independent RS. So (he said, hesitant to ask) discuss? ((reply here is best) --Lexein (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I certainly understand. So should this chunk go back in, or stay out? --Lexein (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. I'll keep an eye out for other sources. --Lexein (talk) 16:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Barefoot Bandit Photo

Can't the photo be included in the article in the section about notoriety as the photo he took of himself is itself the internet meme? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.56.254.175 (talk) 03:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

No. I wouldn't call the Barefoot Bandit an Internet Meme. But good luck trying to add the photo he took of himself to Wikipedia -- there's a Copyright Cop that watches the article that won't let that happen. WTF? (talk) 15:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)